Carmena v. E. BATON ROUGE SHERIFF'S OFFICE

947 So. 2d 715, 2007 WL 293345
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedFebruary 2, 2007
Docket2006-CA-2680
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 947 So. 2d 715 (Carmena v. E. BATON ROUGE SHERIFF'S OFFICE) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Carmena v. E. BATON ROUGE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, 947 So. 2d 715, 2007 WL 293345 (La. 2007).

Opinion

947 So.2d 715 (2007)

Sandy CARMENA, et al.
v.
The EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE, et al.

No. 2006-CA-2680.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 2, 2007.

PER CURIAM.

The State of Louisiana invokes the appellate jurisdiction of this court pursuant to La. Const. art. V, § 5(D), on the ground that the district court declared certain executive orders of the governor (KBB 2005-32, *716 KBB 2005-48 and KBB 2005-67) as well as Act 6 of the 2005 Extraordinary Session to be unconstitutional.

Pretermitting the merits, we find the appeal is not properly before this court. Article V, § 5(D) vests appellate jurisdiction in this court in cases in which "a law or ordinance has been declared unconstitutional. . . ." A review of the district court's judgment indicates the court merely granted defendants' exception of prescription. Nothing in the judgment declares a law or ordinance unconstitutional.

Although the district court's reasons for judgment discuss the constitutionality of the governor's executive orders and a subsequent legislative enactment, it is well-settled law that the trial court's oral or written reasons form no part of the judgment. See La.Code Civ. P. art.1918; see also Haynes v. United Parcel Service, 05-2378 (La.7/6/06), 933 So.2d 765; Spiers v. Roye, 04-2189 (La.App. 1st Cir.2/10/06), 927 So.2d 1158; Davis v. Hoffman, 00-2326 (La.App. 4th Cir.10/24/01), 800 So.2d 1028; LaRocca v. Bailey, 01-0618 (La. App. 3rd Cir.11/7/01), 799 So.2d 1263; Marino v. Marino, 576 So.2d 1196 (La. App. 5th Cir.1991); City of Kaplan v. Mayard, 616 So.2d 826 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1993).

Because there is no declaration of unconstitutionality in the district court's judgment, there is no basis for the exercise of this court's appellate jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is transferred to the court of appeal, which is instructed to consolidate it with plaintiffs' pending appeal in that court.[1]

NOTES

[1] In resolving the appeal, the court of appeal should be mindful of the principal that courts should refrain from reaching or determining the constitutionality of legislation unless, in the context of a particular case, the resolution of this is essential to the decision of the case or controversy. Badeaux v. Southwest Computer Bureau, Inc., 05-0612 (La.3/17/06), 929 So.2d 1211; Cat's Meow, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, 98-0601 (La.10/20/98), 720 So.2d 1186.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Barber v. Louisiana Workforce Commission
221 So. 3d 38 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2017)
State v. Foret
136 So. 3d 792 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2014)
State v. Williams
94 So. 3d 770 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2012)
Florida Gas Transmission Co. v. Louisiana Tax Commission
10 So. 3d 1219 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2009)
In re J.G.
996 So. 2d 492 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)
Meaux v. Galtier
972 So. 2d 1137 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2008)
Burmaster v. Plaquemines Parish Government
963 So. 2d 378 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
947 So. 2d 715, 2007 WL 293345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carmena-v-e-baton-rouge-sheriffs-office-la-2007.